SURYA COMMODITIES PVT LTD Vs. BHARAT RAJ SINGH S/O LATE HARDAYAS SINGH
LAWS(JHAR)-2015-5-44
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on May 08,2015

Surya Commodities Pvt Ltd Appellant
VERSUS
Bharat Raj Singh S/O Late Hardayas Singh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

P P BHATT, J. - (1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for setting aside the order dated 10.3.2011 passed by the learned Munsif, Hazaribagh, in Eviction Suit No. 20/09, whereby the learned court -below illegally rejected the petition dated 19.07.2010 filed on behalf of the intervenor/ petitioner under Order -1 Rule 10 of the CPC. It is further prayed that necessary direction may be issued to the learned court -below to add the petitioner as a party in the suit.
(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the impugned order dated 10.3.2011 and other materials placed on record.
(3.) IT appears that the petition was filed under Order -1 Rule 10 of the CPC on behalf of the petitioner. Order -1 Rule -10 of the CPC reads as under: "10. Suit in name of wrong plaintiff. - (1) Where a suit has been instituted in the name of the wrong person as plaintiff or where it is doubtful whether it has been instituted in the name of the right plaintiff, the Court may at any stage of the suit, if satisfied that the suit has been instituted through a bona fide mistake, and that it is necessary for the determination of the real matter in dispute so to do, order any other person to be substituted or added as plaintiff upon such terms as the Court thinks just. (2)Court may strike out or add parties. - The Court may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without the application of either party, and on such terms as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any party improperly joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, be struck out, and that the name of any person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit, be added. (3) No person shall be added as a plaintiff suing without a next friend or as the next friend of a plaintiff under any disability without his consent. (4) Where defendant added, plaint to be amended. - Where a defendant is added, the plaint shall, unless the Court otherwise directs, be amended in such manner as may be necessary, and amended copies of the summons and of the plaint shall be served on the new defendant and, if the Court thinks fit, on the original defendant. (5) Subject to the provisions of the Indian Limitation Act, 1877 (15 of 1877), section 22, the proceedings as against any person added as defendant shall be deemed to have begun only on the service of the summons." It appears that during pendency of the suit, plaintiffs have jointly transferred the land and house measuring an area of 6060 sq. ft. comprising of Plot Nos. 790 and 791 bearing Holding Nos. 212 and 213 respectively in favour of petitioner vide registered deed No.5430/5264, dated 28.04.2010 and hence, the petitioner became interested party in the suit.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.